On 01/05/2018 11:40, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > POWER has the same thing. It's actually stronger separation, since user > processes don't share addresses either -- all processes, including the > kernel, have windowed access to an 80-bit address space, so no process > can even describe an address in another process's address space. There > are ways, of course, in which IBM could have messed up the > implementation, so the fact that it *should* be secure does not mean it > *is*.
That's interesting, as it conflicts with Red Hat's vulnerability disclosure. It that because the silicon is buggy, or because Linux somehow ends up being vulnerable when it need not be? > > SPARC avoids the issue because almost all implementations are in-order. Definitely not true of the post-Oracle models. I saw a tech talk on the core once. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
